IntelliBriefs bring you Intelligence briefs on Geopolitics , Security and Intelligence from around the world . We gather information and insights from multiple sources and present you in a digestible format to quench your thirst for right perspective, with right information at right time at right place . We encourage people to contact us with any relevant information that other news media organizations don't cover . Contact :intellibriefs@gmail.com

July 28, 2010

ASEAN believes that the proposed inclusion of U.S. and Russia in the East Asia Summit will not inevitably lead to a power struggle among the big players in the region.Can an optimal-sized East Asia Summit (EAS), an organisation and not a conference, become a governing council with a mandate to oversee, regulate, or manage the complexity of growing relations among the countries of an expanding region?

The answer is being determined by the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), a long-standing non-military bloc of 10 disparate countries with an insatiable appetite for ‘smart diplomacy' in their own ‘collective' self-interest.

What are the basic facts behind this latest snapshot of diplomatic action in East Asia as expressed in words?

First, a clear distinction exists between geopolitical East Asia and the geographical area in the eastern arc of the Asian continent. The geopolitical space of the existing EAS far exceeds the geographical confines of East Asia, because the organisation includes India, Australia, and New Zealand. These countries do not belong to geographical East Asia.

Secondly and more importantly, the EAS will soon be larger than at present under the ASEAN's new vision plan, which is being translated into follow-up “modalities.” The United States and Russia are likely to be formally invited to join the EAS.

With this, the EAS may well need a change of name as well! At this stage, though, the ASEAN, which floated the EAS five years ago and continues to function as its nucleus, does not propose any change of name. Besides the ASEAN's 10 constituent members, the existing EAS has in its fold six of their dialogue partners: China, Japan, and South Korea, besides India, Australia, and New Zealand.

The proposed inclusion of the U.S. and Russia is meant to optimise the size of the EAS. For now, the 10 ASEAN Foreign Ministers, who met in Hanoi last week, have decided that the ‘collective' self-interest of their countries would be best served by an expanded EAS, which can have 18 members in due course. These Foreign Ministers have also “recommended” to the ASEAN heads of state or government to take a formal decision on this issue during their scheduled summit in Hanoi in October this year.

What cannot, therefore, be exaggerated is the urgency of deciding the qualitative parameters of this organisation in its proposed full-fledged form. It is in this context that the third but not the least basic fact in East Asian inter-state diplomacy becomes doubly relevant. Simply put, this basic fact is that the calculus of conventional wisdom does not always drive politics, including inter-state interactions.

“Leaders-led EAS”

Unsurprisingly, therefore, the ASEAN, and not China or Japan or India, currently pilots the “leaders-led EAS.” And, the ASEAN is aware that its “centrality” to the security and economic well-being of geopolitical East Asia is grudgingly accepted by the bigger powers like China, Japan, and India. Each of these three competing powers cannot allow the other two, acting alone or in unison, to dictate the security and economic agendas of the EAS. Being sure of such a ‘ground reality,' the ASEAN tends to believe that China, India, and Japan find it comforting to engage each other in the company of other EAS members. Such an ‘empirical' reality of inter-state equations in geopolitical East Asia has now guided the 10 ASEAN Foreign Ministers to apply the same logic to the issue of admitting the U.S. and Russia into the EAS fold. Washington is generally seen across East Asia as a troubled but resilient intercontinental player with a global reach. And, Moscow is viewed as a yesteryear-global-player with a future-oriented agenda of resurgence. Both Russia and the U.S. are still nuclear superpowers. So, the ASEAN does not expect them to quarrel over their relative importance to geopolitical East Asia.

For reasons of contemporary history and because of the emerging post-modern global affairs in a space-cyberspace age, the ASEAN continues to accept the existential reality of the U.S. being “a resident power” in geopolitical East Asia. As for Moscow's credentials, Russia's far-east domain juts right onto the eastern seaboard of the Asian continent. Moreover, post-Soviet Russia, with its dramatically improved equation with China, is already a key participant in the now-stalled six-party talks on the denuclearisation of Korean peninsula.

The U.S.-Russia power differential may come into play in an expanded EAS at some stage in the future. However, the ASEAN's primary concerns, in its ‘collective' self-interest, necessitate suitable engagement with both these countries in as transparent a fashion as possible in a multilateral setting.

A relevant question, therefore, is whether the ASEAN has, while keeping its own interest in focus, taken sufficient notice of the interests of other EAS players like China or India or Japan.

Foreign Ministers of the existing 16-member EAS have in fact “welcomed” the ASEAN initiative for inviting the U.S. and Russia in due course. These ministers met in Hanoi during the course of a series of ASEAN-led dialogue sessions that concluded there last week. India was represented by Minister of State for External Affairs, Preneet Kaur, who was assisted by Secretary (East), Latha Reddy, and Ambassador Biren Nanda among others.

Expressing “respect” for the ASEAN's “valuable … consensus” on the U.S.-Russia-admission issue, China has conveyed its readiness to “stay in communication with other parties so as to finally reach consensus through consultations.” Critics of the notion of a futurist ‘Pax Sinica' may see in this formulation some signs of hesitation or reluctance to have the U.S. in the EAS. But the ASEAN itself has offered to “consult” its dialogue partners like China, India, and Japan in fine-tuning the “appropriate arrangements and timing” for the admission of the U.S. and Russia. Japan, while noting the ASEAN's offer of consultations on this issue, has expressed “support” for the inclusion of the U.S. and Russia.

For India, its Look-East policy has already produced a diplomatic dividend: the founding-membership in the EAS. Besides that, the possible or likely admission of the U.S. and Russia into this organisation is in sync with New Delhi's current world view.

Regardless of India's equations with the likely new entrants, its actual contributions in sensitive areas will determine its place in the EAS of the future. The kaleidoscopic political complexion of the EAS may compel it to set common but differential goals for different countries in such areas as climate change, energy efficiency, maritime security, and perhaps nuclear non-proliferation. It will, therefore, be a learning experience for India as an ‘emerging economic power' with a potential role in the regional and global domains.

Above all, the ASEAN believes that an expansion of the EAS will not necessarily lead to a power struggle among the big players in geopolitical East Asia. Such a sense of political faith can be reinforced only by a suitable agenda for an expanded EAS in tune with the restrictive realities of a multilateral forum in the next big theatre of global affairs.

Reports being prepared for Patriarch Kirill are apparently showing that the American based Global retail giant, and World’s largest corporation, Wal-Mart has begun ushering in what Russian Church scholars have long stated would be the “Mark of the Beast” age prophesized to come about prior to ending of our present modern day one.

According to the ancient prophecies the “Mark of the Beast” is a combination of letters and symbols that will be physically and permanently placed on the forehead or right hand of peopleMost people will consider it an honor to receive the mark as it will open doors of acceptance, prosperity and peace, or so they will be told.

The sole prophetic reference to the “Mark of the Beast” is contained in the Christian faiths New Testament Bible’s Book of the Revelation of John which in Chapter 13, Verses 16-18 states:

The Book of the Revelation of John is the last in the collection of documents which constitute the New Testament (the second of the two major divisions of the Christian Bible). It is also known as Revelation, the Book of Revelation, the Apocalypse of John, and the Apocalypse. These titles come from the Greek,apokalypsis, meaning revelation, which is the first word of the book.

The word apocalypse is also used for other works of a similar nature, and the style of literature (genre) is known as apocalyptic literature. Such literature is marked by distinctive literary features, particularly prediction of future events and accounts of visionary experiences or journeys to heaven, often involving vivid symbolism. The Book of Revelation is the only apocalyptic document in the New Testament canon, though there are short apocalyptic passages in various places in the Gospels and the Epistles.

Revelation brings together the Worlds of Heaven, Earth, and hell in a final confrontation between the forces of good and evil. Its characters and images are both real and symbolic, spiritual and material, and it is frequently difficult to know which is which. Revelation's cryptic nature has ensured that it would always be a source of controversy. Nevertheless, it has not only endured, but captured the imagination of generations of Bible students, both professionals and laypeople alike.

The author, named John, has traditionally been identified with John the Apostle, to whom the Gospel of John is also attributed. Most scholars think that Revelation was written near the end of the 1st Century.

Russian Church Leaders have long identified both the United States and the European Union as being the places where the “Mark of the Beast” age would originate as these Nations have for the past nearly 4 decades engaged in the systematic eradication of all Christian knowledge from their societies with many of them adopting laws banning the teaching of the religion in their schools and forbidding their students to have Bibles in their possession.

These reports state that the eradication of all ancient religious knowledge, especially the prophecies, was a vital prerequisite to the “Mark of the Beast” age coming about because it could not be accomplished without the ascendancy of the many technological “wonders” our World now has, but which if their true purpose was known would see a rebellion amongst Christian believers against their use.

Popular American and European pop culture, these reports continue, have also co-opted the ancient prophetic warnings of the “Mark of the Beast” age to such an extent that hundreds of millions of unlearned people identify the word Armageddon with the asteroid disaster movie bearing its name, rather than its true meaning as the epic “end of World” battle this age will usher in.

To understand Albrecht’s fears of this “very large and very frightening tracking system” Wal-Mart’s actions are ushering in, one must first understand what these RFID computer chips are.

Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) is the use of an object (typically referred to as an RFID tag) applied to or incorporated into a product, animal, or person for the purpose of identification and tracking using radio waves. Some tags can be read from several meters away and beyond the line of sight of the reader.

Radio-frequency identification comprises interrogators (also known as readers), and tags (also known as labels).

Most RFID tags contain at least two parts. One is an integrated circuit for storing and processing information, modulating and demodulating a radio-frequency (RF) signal, and other specialized functions. The second is an antenna for receiving and transmitting the signal.

There are generally three types of RFID tags: active RFID tags, which contain a battery and can transmit signals autonomously, passive RFID tags, which have no battery and require an external source to provoke signal transmission, and battery assisted passive (BAP) RFID tags, which require an external source to wake up but have significant higher forward link capability providing greater range.

Important to note about RFID tags is how tiny they can be made, and even though Wal-Mart is stating that they are “removable”, one wonders how a buyer of their merchandise can find them, especially with the knowledge that they can be made as small as “dust” sized chips powerful enough to store 38-digit numbers using 128-bit Read Only Memory (ROM).

What’s also important to understand about Wal-Mart’s actions is that as the World’s largest buyer of merchandise and consumer goods it will force all of its suppliers to install RFID tags into all of their products, and which means that these manufactures will have to incorporate the placement of these RFID tags into their manufacturing process regardless who the end buyer will be. (For example: A major International manufacturer of jeans is not going to have two separate facilities making this clothing, one for Wal-Mart putting in these RFID tags, the other not putting them in for everyone else they sell to.)

To fully understand the true scope and power of these RFID tags one must also understand that Wal-Mart’s decision to start incorporating them into their merchandise (coincidentally?) in 2010 also coincides with the estimate that this is the same year that all cell phones sold in the US will have RFID technology in them too and enabling products to be tracked from their point of sale to anywhere they are within communication range of a cell phone, or cell phone like device, including laptop computers, e-book readers and iPods®, to just name a few.

Merchandise sold by Wal-Mart, or for that matter any other retailer, are not the only things being implanted with RFID chips, either, as over the past decade the United States National Animal Identification System (NAIS), the European Unions Trade Control and Expert System (TRACES) and Australia’s National Livestock Identification System (NLIS) have implemented programmes to ensure that all farm animals in their countries are computer tagged and controlled.

All that is left now, these reports continue, to fully usher in the “Mark of the Beast” age is the implanting into human beings these same RFID tags being put into farm animals which will enable those governments doing so to track every aspect of their citizens lives, to include:

An obese person attempting to purchase a fatty type food would have their purchase denied based on RFID communication between the food they are attempting to buy and what is mandated on their RFID tag enabled electronic medical records.

A person owing an outstanding balance on their mortgage or credit card would have all other purchases denied based on the RFID communication between that persons banks and credit bureaus.

A person attempting to purchase guns or ammunition would have it denied based on the RFID communication between that person and their criminal record.

Though these are but a few of the things being envisioned by the elite classes for their RFID tagged citizens it must also be mentioned that there are “greater good” aspects to the “Mark of the Beast” age too, and which include:

The immediate tracking of RFID tag implanted children who go missing or are abducted.

The immediate availability of a RFID tag implanted person’s entire medical history in the event of an emergency.

To how soon this “Mark of the Beast” age will begin we can, perhaps, glimpse from a recent report in the Washington Post that shows that the United States has become a virtual police state with fully 1,271 of its government organizations and 1,931 of its private companies, both employing over 850,000, are engaged in intelligence activities solely designed to track and control nearly every aspect of their citizens lives.

To the greatest moral issue facing people relating to the soon coming “Mark of the Beast” age these reports warn [though this is an issue still being strongly debated within the Russian Church] that merely by one accepting into their lives any form of it means they are accepting it all.

Now to if by ones mere purchasing, or using of merchandise containing “Mark of the Beast” technology will condemn them many are perplexed due to the many good aspects they provide to modern humanity. Many of our World’s oldest religious communities however, including the Amish people living in the United States, believe the safest course of action has is to keep from their lives all “Mark of the Beast” technology so as not to even give the appearance of acceptance.

To the safest course of action to be taken, and as we see it, one must decide for themselves, and should do so sooner rather than later because, like it or not, the age of the “Mark of the Beast” is upon us all.

Russian diplomatic and foreign affairs experts are in shock today over the International Court of Justice (World Court) [symbol top photo left] ruling yesterday that declared the independence declaration of the Serbian province of Kosovo to be legal and not a violation of International Law.

Note: The independence declaration of Kosovo has long divided the United States and Russia, which have respectively championed Kosovo’s and Serbia’s cause. It has also split several International blocs. Most European Union member-states recognize Kosovo’s independence, but five others – Spain, Cyprus, Slovakia,Greece and Romania do not due to separatist movements in their own Nations that threaten their sovereignty.

Though this World Court ruling is being supported by the United States now, Russian historical intelligence analysts in a report today on this momentous event are warning that the Americans, more than any other Nation on Earth, stand the most to lose because of it, especially President Obama, who by his administrations support of Kosovo now puts him firmly opposed to the most powerful of the United States “secret” orders, the Society of Cincinnati. [Photo Order of Cincinnati emblem bottom left]

The Society of the Cincinnati is a historic organization with branches in the United States and France founded in 1783 to preserve the ideals and fellowship of the Revolutionary War officers and to pressure the government to honor pledges it had made to officers who fought for American independence. Now in its third century, the Society purports itself as a nonprofit historical and educational organization that promotes public interest in the American Revolution through its library and museum collections, exhibitions, programs, publications, and other activities

The concept of the Society of the Cincinnati was originated from Major General Henry Knox. The first meeting of the Society was held in May 1783 at a dinner atMount Gulian (Verplanck House) in Fishkill, New York, before the British evacuation from New York City. The meeting was chaired by Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Hamilton, and the participants agreed to stay in contact with each other after the war. Membership was generally limited to officers who had served at least three years in the Continental Army or Navy but included officers of the French Army and Navy above certain ranks.

Later, membership was passed down to the eldest son after the death of the original member. Present-day hereditary members generally must be descended from an officer who served in the Continental Army or Navy for at least three years, from an officer who died or was killed in service, or from an officer serving at the close of the Revolution.

Each officer may be represented by only one descendant at any given time, following the rules of primogeniture (right of first born). It was this aspect ofprimogeniture which caused the society initially to be controversial, as primogeniture was associated with the rules governing European nobilities.

The Society is named after Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus, who left his farm to accept a term as Roman Consul and then served as Magister Populi (with temporary powers similar to that of a modern era dictator), thereby assuming lawful dictatorial control of Rome to meet a war emergency.

When the battle was won, he returned power to the Senate and went back to plowing his fields. The Society's motto reflects that ethic of selfless service: Omnia Relinquit Servare Republicam (“He relinquished everything to save the Republic”).

The Society has from the beginning had three objectives, referred to as the “Immutable Principles”: “To preserve the rights so dearly won; to promote the continuing Union of the States; and to assist members in need, their widows, and their orphans.”

Important to note, this report says, is that in all of the United States history only seven of its Presidents have been members of the Society of Cincinnati, four of them following the assassination of their predecessor.

The first Society of Cincinnati member to gain the Presidency was General George Washington (1732-1799) who is credited with being the “Father of the Nation” for winning his Nation’s war of Independence from the British.Washington gained further fame by returning to his Virginia farm in the “spirit of Cincinnatus” after ending his second term of office and not, as many had wished, becoming a king.

The second Society of Cincinnati member to become President was General Andrew Jackson (1767-1845). A hero of the War of 1812 for defeating a superior British force at the Battle of New Orleans, Jackson was put into power by the Society of Cincinnati to defeat the establishment of a Central Bank that was supported by President John Quincy Adams (1767-1848) and was feared would split the Nation.

Of the danger facing the United States should a Central Bank be allowed to gain control of the US economy Jackson warned:

Adams was enraged at his and the Central Banks defeat by Jackson and refused to attend his inauguration.To his dying day Adams retained a great hatred of the Society of Cincinnati and as a Member of the United States House of Representatives (the only American President to serve in this body after leaving office.) cast the only “no” vote on a law to give medals to the US Military officers who had served in the Mexican-American War (1846-1848).Immediately after casting his vote Adamscollapsed and died two days later.

The third Society of Cincinnati member to become President was General Ulysses S. Grant(1822-1885), who like Jackson before him was put into power to defeat those forces attempting to create a Central Bank said needed due to the United States massive debts incurred from their Civil War (1861-1865) and opposed by President Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865), who said:

Note:Contrary to what American school children are taught today, Lincolndid not free all the slaves in the United States, that was done by President Johnson. What Lincoln did do was sign two executive orders under the authority of his position as “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy" under Article II, section 2 of the United States Constitution”. The first one, issued September 22, 1862, declared the freedom of all slaves in any state of the Confederate States of America that did not return to Union control by January 1, 1863. The second order, issued January 1, 1863, named ten specific states where it would apply. These two executive orders are today known as the “Emancipation Proclamation”.

Note:Not even told to American schoolchildren about their true history was that Russian Naval squadrons set out towards the coast of North America in the second half of 1863 to protect the United States from British and French invasions. (British Forces landed in Canada, French Forces in Mexico) The Atlantic squadron commanded by rear admiral S.S. Lesovskii (frigate "AleksandrNevsky", "Peresvet", "Osliabia", corvettes "Variag", "Vitiaz" and clipper "Almaz") departed from the Russian port of Kronshtadt and went to New York. Another squadron - Pacific - was commanded by rear admiral A.A. Popov (corvettes "Bogatyr", "Kalevala", "Rynda", "Novik", clippers "Abrek" and "Gaidamak"). They went from the ports of the Far East and set out to San Francisco. In September 1863, the squadron of Lesovskii arrived at the port of New York, and the squadron of Popov - to the port of San Francisco. The Russian squadrons stayed in these ports of North America and sailed near its West and East coasts until August 1864.

For President Johnson’s continued opposing the aims of the Central Bankers he was greatly weakened by two attempts to impeach him from office[In 1926 the US Supreme Court ruled the basis for those impeachment attempts as unconstitutional.] thus necessitating the need for the Society of Cincinnati to put General Grant in power.

The forth Society of Cincinnati member to become President was Chester A. Arthur (1829-1886) who was also the first non-military member of the order to ascend to the Presidency but did so through the rules of primogeniture (right of first born) granted to him as the direct descendant of maternal grandfather and Revolutionary War leader Uriah Stone and was “established in place” to take power upon the assassination by these European bankers of President James A. Garfield (1831-1881).

The fifth Society of Cincinnati member to become President of the United States was William McKinley (1843-1901) whose membership in the order was granted under their rules of primogeniture through his grandfather and American Revolutionary War hero David McKinley, and who by his own right had distinguished himself as a hero in the Civil War.

President McKinley began his attack against the Central Bankers with his ally and Secretary of State John Sherman (1823-1900) whose connection with the Society of Cincinnati was through the membership of his older brother and Civil War here General William Tecumseh Sherman (1820-1891).The legal tool used by President McKinley and Sherman against the European bankers was the law known as the “Sherman Antitrust Act” which was first brought to bear against the Rothschild supported and funded JP Morgan financial empire known as the Northern Trust who by the late 1800’s owned nearly all of America’s railroads.

Note:George Peabody, a Massachusetts’s trader, set up a banking house - George Peabody & Co. - in London in 1837. He became regarded as a "financial ambassador in London. Carrol Quigley attributes the use of tax-exempt foundations for manipulation of society to Peabody, seen in his European based Peabody foundation.

Daniel Colt Gilman, a member of the Skull & Bones and first President of the Carnegie Institution, was involved in the establishment of the Peabody foundation. He was in such high regard by the elite that they have erected a statue of him across from the Bank of England. Peabody was getting old and needed a younger partner. Junius Morgan, of Hartford, Connecticut, was recommended to Peabody.

In 1854 Junius and his family arrived in London to join George Peabody & Co. When the elite’s concocted American Civil War broke out, Peabody and Junius Morgan raised loans for the North. It appears Junius played both sides of the war. Ralph Epperson claims Junius was one of the Rothschild agents who shipped supplies to the South.

When Peabody retired in 1864 Junius took over the business. The firm was re-named JS. Morgan & Co. That same year Junius’ son, J.P. Morgan, became a junior partner in the firm. A year later J.P. left for America to represent the firm in the New York. After the end of the Franco-Prussian War, Junius Morgan was called on to help restore the French economy.

Around this time his bank was talked of as a rival to the Rothschild’s New Court, but Junius was a Rothschild agent, when he prospered so prospered the Rothschild’s and the Illuminati. J.S. Morgan & Co. was one of the Rothschild’s great power tools in the United States. In 1869 Junius’ son, J.P. Morgan went to London to met with the Rothschild’s. They laid out the plans to form Northern Securities, a company that would act as an agent for New Court in the USwith JP Morgan ruling as a proxy for the family.

In 1871 Junius’ son, J.P. Morgan, made an alliance with Tony Drexel, heir to the powerful Philadelphia bank. Their firm - Drexel, Morgan & Co. -resided in an extravagant new building on Wall St., which is still Morgan headquarters today. After the Europeans got over their lack of confidence at the end of the CIvil War, money began to stream across the ocean to the US, providing massive profit for the firm. It set out to finance the growing number of industrial projects in America. The House of Morgan was getting extremely rich and this past week announced a quarterly profit of $1.46 Billion.

Note:The Roosevelt’s had been in New York since the mid-17th century. Theodore Roosevelt was born into a wealthy family of Dutch origin; by the 19th century, the family had grown in wealth, power and influence from the profits of several businesses including hardware and plate-glass importing.

The family was strongly Democratic in its political affiliation until the mid-1850s, then joined the new Republican Party. Theodore's father, known in the family as "Thee", was a New York City philanthropist, merchant, and partner in the family glass-importing firm Roosevelt and Son. He was a prominent supporter of Abraham Lincoln and the Union effort during the American Civil War.

His mother Mittie Bulloch was a Southern belle from a slave-owning family in Roswell, Georgia and had quiet Confederate sympathies. Mittie's brother, Theodore's uncle, James Dunwoody Bulloch, was a United States Navy officer who became a Confederate admiral and naval procurement agent in Britain. Another uncle, Irvine Bulloch, was a midshipman on the Confederate raider CSS Alabama; both remained in England after the war.From his grandparents' home, the young Roosevelt witnessed Abraham Lincoln's funeral procession when it came through New York.

The last chance for the Society of Cincinnati to thwart the European plan to establish a Central Bank in the United States ended on April 14, 1912 with the deliberate sinking of the RMS Titanic by British agents that killed one of the orders members named Major Archibald Willingham Butt (1865-1912) along with the American business tycoons John Jacob Astor IV, Benjamin Guggenheim and Isidor Straus who were returning to the United States from Great Britain after what they believed was a successful “negotiation” with the Rothschild’s to “leave America alone” under “threat of war”.

Note:Throughout this over 300 year battle between the forces for freedom and independence against these European (and now by extension United States) banking interests many in America, like Germany of last century, are led to believe that powerful Jewish interests control these monolithic institutions.

Nothing could be further from the truth.In fact, even though there are Jewish families involved in these powerful banks they are now, and always have been controlled by European royalty aided and abetted in their crimes against humanity by the Catholic Church.If not for the actions of many of America’s and Europe’s most powerful Jewish families the European and Catholic Church “master plan” to control the entire World would have been accomplished a hundred years ago.

According to Burke's Peerage, the Bible of European aristocratic genealogy, all American Presidents (including Obama) have carried European royal bloodlines into office. 34 have been genetic descendants from just one person,Charlemagne, the brutal eighth century King of the Franks. 19 of them directly descended from King Edward III of England. In fact, the Presidential candidate with the most royal genes has won every single American election. The Society of Cincinnati in knowing that European royal interests would always seek to gain control of America has always managed to “convert” many of these Presidents to their cause too.

With the last “obstacles” removed from creating a Central Bank in the United States with the sinking of the Titanic the European banking powers forced through the American legal system what is known as the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 which once enacted (and remains to this day) became the sole and complete authority over the United States economy forcing the American people into two World Wars and countless other conflicts during the past 97 years all designed with one single purpose, to create for Europe’s royal families a “New World Order” controlled by them.

After World War II (1939-1945) the sixth Society of Cincinnati member to become President of the United States was General Dwight David “Ike” Eisenhower (1890-1969), who was “appalled” over his Nations defacto surrender to Nazi German forces during World War II in order to obtain the atomic bomb Hitler was ready to use against them, and the deliberate murder of his close friend and fellow Society of Cincinnati member General George S. Patton (1885-1945) who upon his learning that Europe’s royal “powers” had delivered the atomic bombs secrets to the Soviet Union was ready to march against them.

Prior to the expiration of President Eisenhower’s second term [American Presidents are only allowed to serve two 4-year terms] the Society of Cincinnati attempted to install another one of their members as President but failed when Texas Senator Lyndon B. Johnson (1908-1973) was defeated by President John F. Kennedy (1917-1963) in the 1960 election.

Johnson was, however, able to gain President Kennedy as a Society of Cincinnati ally to the fight against the European royal powers attempting to destroy America, and they appeared near victory when on June 4, 1963 President Kennedy issued Executive Order 1110 which for the first time since 1913 returned to the United States government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve (Central Bank).

Upon the death of President Kennedy, President Johnson became the seventh and last Society of Cincinnati leader of America, and one of his first acts was to repeal Kennedy’s Executive Order 1110.

Since 1963, to this present day, the United States has remained under the control of the royal European banking elite through their control of the Federal Reserve who during this past nearly 60 years have all but dismantled what was once the great Nation known as the United States of America.

Through their infiltration of all levels of government, corporations and media, they have used their forces to destroy America’s “moral fiber” and reduce this once great power to but a shadow of its former self.Their once great industrial might is now gone, their schools are noted for their shockingly high dropout rates (even those who graduate know less than a child born a century ago), its once great cities are fast falling into ruin as its roads and bridges disintegrate too, and, perhaps worst of all, these once great people have nearly lost all hope.

But, for good or bad, and as this report continues, the World Court’s ruling on Kosovo may point to what could very well be a revival….but not without America and her people experiencing a “cataclysmic shock” as their Nation faces the certain prospect of outright civil war and could very possibly by destroyed.

The stage for this all occurring is being set now as the most pivotal day in the history of the United States is racing towards us all….December 21, 2012.

For as this date is more well known as the end of the ancient Mayans long count calendar (and ending of the World?), it is also the date the Federal Reserve’s 99-year old charter to control the American economy ends.And, most importantly, for it to be renewed it would require not only a majority vote in both houses [Senate and House of Representatives] of the US Congress, but also a three-quarter majority vote by every one of their 50 States’ legislative bodies.

Russian diplomatic, historical, financial, and intelligence experts, who have followed this saga for decades, all conclude that the Great Game being played between the Society of Cincinnati and the royal European banking powers amounts to nothing less than the complete reshaping of the entire World for centuries to come, it is that momentous of a moment.

On the side of the Society of Cincinnati are those forces that have, literally, turned on the “money spigot” to force the Federal Reserve into total outright bankruptcy by enlarging the United States debt to stratospheric proportions beyond any hope of it being paid.On the other side are the royal European banking interests who, along with their Vatican allies, are plunging the European Union into the largest monetary contraction known to history by cutting their Nation’s budgets to the “bare bone” in order to have the reserves to prop up what’s left of America when it eventually defaults.

Standing on the sidelines, so to speak, is the rest of the World, most notably Russia, China, the Arab World, South America, and Israel…all of whom are arming themselves “to the teeth” as nearly all of them believe this saga will erupt into Total Global Warfare as these most ancient of foes battle to the death.

Most important to remember about everything you’ve read so far is that it was taken nearly verbatim from the files located in Russia’s Foreign Ministry that we were granted unprecedented access to.These are the same reports that Russian academic Igor Panarin, dean of the Russian Foreign Ministry's academy for future diplomats, based his report upon that stated the United States would begin to disintegrate into civil war in 2010 and break apart into a number of separate Nations.

Though Professor Panarin’s grim report on the United States has been derided in the West, especially in America, the “trigger events” he based his analysis upon have all come true….and none more important than the World Court’s Kosovo ruling that gives any US State, or group of US States, Indian Reservations, or as much land that their illegal Mexican population can seize and hold, that declare their independence from the United States Federal Government can now be legally recognized by any country in the World.

According to Professor Panarin’s report this is one possible look at how the once Great American Empire will end up:

For any American reading this report and believing it not true, they are in the greatest danger because they are, and to put it plainly, ignorant fools.

To them we highly suggest they read (Today!) the American Spectator report “America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution” written by Boston University’s Professor Emeritus of International Relations at Boston University Angelo M. Codevilla that details how the two classes that exist in America today have less in common culturally, dislike each other more, and embody ways of life more different from one another than did the 19th century's Northerners and Southerners….the ones that started the Civil War.

To the rest of you, we strongly encourage you to support our efforts by going to the Sorcha Faal’s Special Report “Everything Will Change….” and giving whatever you can to help us “pay” our dear Russian friends who have given us such unprecedented access to their most private of files and increase our likelihood of getting more of them in the future.

Also, to the thousands of independent news and website blogs, all around the World, who take the Sorcha Faal’s reports and post them on your sites without including the links or, even worse, not even linking back to this reports original source…Shame On You!All you are accomplishing by your actions [aside from the outright theft of intellectual property that doesn’t belong to you] is depriving your readers of the full knowledge contained in these reports provided by the links we have put into them going back, and as it should be, to the original source material.

Note: To all those supporting our efforts, in any amount, you will receive Part II of this Special Report complied directly from Russian Foreign Ministry files: President Barack Obama: Friend or Foe? You’re Going To Be Surprised!

Sunitha RAJU, Jaydeep MUKHERJEE

Fiscal Deficit, Crowding Out, and the Sustainability of Economic Growth: The Case of the Indian Economy

Asie Visions 31, juillet 2010

This study examines the long-run relationship between the fiscal deficit, the crowding out of private capital formation and net exports for the Indian economy during the period from 1980-81 to 2008-09. Applying unit root tests and cointegration techniques that allow for endogenously determined structural breaks, the analysis is done separately with the gross fiscal deficit of the central government, and the combined deficits of the central and state governments. The results do not indicate any long-run relationship among the variables, despite the balance-of-payments crisis of 1990-91 and sudden jump in deficits from 1997-98 onwards. Our finding supports neither a crowding out nor a crowding in hypothesis between government spending and private investment. On the contrary, our result hints at the Ricardian Equivalence Theory on public debt, implying thereby that it does not matter whether a government finances its spending with debt or a tax increase, the effect on the total level of demand in an economy will be the same.

The fiscal adjustment carried out as a combination of revenue augmenting measures as well as appropriate expenditure adjustment has helped to achieve sustained high economic growth with macroeconomic stability. While the actual numbers for disciplining fiscal deficit is debatable, the way forward for India is the recognition that fiscal responsibility rules are imperative for sustaining macro output growth. Further, standalone fiscal deficit targets would not be sufficient if not supported by targets on revenue or primary deficit.

The sinking of the South Korean frigate, Cheonan, by a North Korean torpedo on March 26 has raised questions of shock waves far away from the site of incident. Having signaled that it may conduct a third nuclear weapons test at a time of its choosing, North Korea or Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) has held out (July 24) physical response to the US-South Korea (POK) naval exercise in the Sea of Japan with nuclear weapons.

Nobody is taking DPRK’s nuclear threat seriously, and should not. It is a North Korean tactics of holding out maximum threat. But at the same time, North Korea’s nieghbours cannot help but take serious note of such outbursts from their unpredictable neighbor.

China is critical where North Korea is concerned. Pyongyang depends on Beijing for almost everything from energy to food and support in the international arena. Most of the countries involved in the region including the US believe China is sincerely trying to bring Pyongyang back to the six-party talks on the North Korean nuclear issue. On the other hand, it remains North Korea’s most vocal supporter.

As the Cheonan incident suggest, China does not want North Korea in a tight corner especially militarily. Is China afraid that if Pyongyang feels seriously threatened militarily it could precipitate a disastrous situation in the region? Or, does its strategy involve keeping an unpredictable regime which has reportedly acquired nuclear capability, as an asset for brinkmanship?

That is why China’s reaction to the Cheonan incident raises very pertinent questions that eventually extends beyond the immediate North East Asian region.

The sinking of the Cheonan raised serious questions and apprehension not only in South Korea, but also in Japan and down to South East Asia. Following the attempt to assassinate South Korean President Chun Doo-Hwan in Burma (Myanmar) in 1983, North Korea had restrained itself considerably at least in actions. In the Cheonan incident 46 South Korean sailors were killed.

China’s hectic diplomacy helped cool down international reaction to a great extent. The UN condemnation, greatly influenced by China and accepted by the US, Japan and South Korea, fell short of naming North Korea for the incident. American and experts from other countries examining the wreck of the ship concluded it went down to a torpedo attack.

China is yet to make public the result of their inspection. The reason is very clear.

The US is unsure how to deal with North Korea with China standing behind Pyongyang. The tension is now shifting from beyond North Korea to a China-US face off in the waters of the region.

The US and Seoul announced a large scale joint military exercise in the Yellow Sea in the aftermath of the Cheonan incident. The avowed reason was to deter North Korea from further escalating the situation by launching new attacks.

Apparently, China saw a more sinister meaning in the proposed US-South Korean exercise. While the date of this exercise was set vaguely in mid-July, Beijing responded with its own military exercise in the East China Sea from June 30 to July 05.

It was a live fire exercise involving ships, submarines, aircraft and helicopters, with emphasis on tracking and warships attacking various targets in its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). China has been protesting against US naval vessels entering its EEZ’s for mapping and surveying activities that are seen as espionage related. While China cannot challenge the US activities as per international law and the UN laws of Seas to which is a signatory, it has its own perception on territorial issues.

While on the one hand Chinese top leaders repeatedly claim that China is a developing country, this argument is used only in financial, economic, trade and environmental issues where it can gain from such a position.

On the other hand, the Chinese military establishment and political attendants are highly assertive on territorial and foreign policy issues. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) suspended military-to-military contacts with the US last year following US agreement to supply $6.4 billion modern weapons to Taiwan. The Americans are concerned about this as military contacts are important to diffuse tensions and face off. A retired Chinese Admiral, Yan Yin told American interlocutors earlier this year that if there was a nuclear war it would be between China and the US in the region.

In the run up to the US-South Korean military exercise which started on July 25 for a first four-day phase in the Sea of Japan or the East Sea, the Chinese official media, military leaders like Gen. Ma Xiaton (Chief spokesman of the PLA) and leading think tank experts opened up a concentrated exposition of criticism on the exercise, especially on US intentions. The central point was the Yellow Sea which China considers its waters of interests, andthat past invasions came through the seas especially the Yellow Sea.

The military linked voices from China particularly pointed out that the US navy would be able to identify the channels used by Chinese submarines and ships to get to the blue waters. They had serious objection to the participation of US aircraft carrier US George Washington, one of the largest in the world, in this exercise. The presence of the US George Washington so close to China’s territorial waters and demonstrating some of its devastating military capabilities along with other ships and aircraft, could have negative psychological effect on the PLA fighters and even the people.

US President Barack Obama, whose China policy is a half-way house, appears to have pressed his appeasement button. The exercise was pulled out from the Yellow Sea to the Sea of Japan, East of the Korean peninsula. But that also has not satisfied the Chinese. This is the biggest ever US-South Korean military exercise comprising 8000 men, which signals that the US was very much engaged in the region militarily.

One important position was brought out by an article in the official China Daily of July 13. The article titled “Modernising Navy for self-defence” by Gong Jianhua of the Guangdong Ocean University defined the South China Sea as part of “Core interest” of China. Putting aside Gong’s arguments for a strong navy and claim on various territorial seas and islands, denoting the South China Sea, a major international shipping route and claimed partially by other countries adjacent to it, raises a new troubling scenario. “Core interest” means an interest that is non-negotiable. It is very well known such articles are not individual thoughts of the author but directed and endorsed at the Politburo level or that of the Central Military Commission (CMC), at least.

It is, therefore, not surprising that US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who was in Hanoi to attend the ARF and East Asia Summit, reacted sharply on the South China Sea issue. She made it clear that it was in US interest to keep this region and seas free for international traffic and neutral. It is a hard and no nonsense statement.

In the course of these developments where one tends to see the Chinese covering and abating the increasing threats from North Korea, some notable issues brought out by China’s official media require serious interpretations. These are China’s “Sovereign Waters”, “Waters of China’s Interests” and China’s “Psychological Territorial Seas”.

All the three are military ideological postulates. To think the Chinese military stands to attention at the civilian leadership’s command is unrealistic. In some ways the PLA’s voice is like that of the Pakistan army’s in some specific areas. There include border and territorial issues, and relations with the USA and Japan.

Of the three postulates, “Sovereign Waters” is understandable if it conforms to international laws. It, however, appears that the Chinese are trying to superimpose their (concocted) historical claims over international laws in their maritime territorial claims.

“Psychological territorial Waters” would threaten neighbouring countries from Japan and South Korea through the Taiwan Strait down to the Malacca Strait. China would impress that any activity in these waters would have to get permission from Beijing. The only way that China executes this policy is through naval, air and military power. There is enough evidence to suggest that it is well on its way to establish this command but for the US position.

“Waters of China’s interest” has no contours. It can be anywhere where China has an interest, and can be extended to coasts of Myanmar (Burma), the Indian Ocean off Sri Lanka, and the Indian Ocean extending to the African coast, Gulf of Aden, Strait of Hormuz and Pakistan.

A Chinese task force is now permanently deployed for anti piracy operation off the coast of Africa. The Indian Ocean, of course, is a water of China’s interest with over 70% of its energy imports transiting these routes. With China penetrating Africa even more deeply, cheap African minerals are already transiting these waters to China. Pakistan has given an open invitation, in Pak Navy Chief Noman Bashir’s words, for Chinese naval ships to use Pakistani ports.

In strategic terms, waters of interest would be waters that China would want to protect. To do that, it would have to work at naval and military network that the US has in different regions. The Chinese military establishment has been studying the US strategy of bases and deployment. Chinese views that China’s territorial sovereignty, strategic resources and trade routes comprise its core interests says China’s naval power projects incrementally with air power and army would parade into areas, waters and regions that comprise strategic and sovereign space of other states.

Though they are far from achieving the US power projection, they are ahead of their Asian counterparts. These theories and postulates make it clear that China is working to place permanent task force on both ends of the Indian Ocean with ships patrolling between the two ends.

It is evident that North Korea is one end of its gun boat diplomacy anchor. Pakistan is the other distant end. In between, they are working on other countries.

In the next decade the Indian Ocean is very likely to see intense maritime rivalry. The Indian Navy must think how it will deal with these developments.

Disclaimer

The views, opinions, positions or strategies expressed by the authors and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, positions or strategies of IntelliBriefs or any employee thereof. IntelliBriefs make no representations as to accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information on this blog and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use.

IntelliBriefs blog reserves the right to delete, edit, or alter in any manner it sees fit blog entries or comments that it, in its sole discretion, deems to be obscene, offensive, defamatory, threatening, in violation of trademark, copyright or other laws, or is otherwise unacceptable